update-rc.d: fix logic in populate_packages_updatercd
The 'and' logic for the check is wrong. To make things clear, please
see the example below.
Say that we have a recipe A, which has a sysv-init style init script named
initA and no corresponding service file. The recipe inherits update-rc.d,
but it doesn't inherit systemd.bbclass. The DISTRO_FEATURES has 'systemd'
inside it, but it doesn't have 'sysvinit'. Now if we build an image, with
the 'and' logic in the check, the symlinks for initA would not be installed
into /etc/rc?.d directory.
This is incorrect. Because there's no corresponding service. The symlinks
in /etc/rc?.d/ should be created so that the service would be correctly
started at boot time.
The logic should really be 'or' in the check. This is actually what the code
was when it was originally written.
Several different situations are listed below to prove the correctness of the
'or' logic.
If 'sysvinit' is in DISTRO_FEATURES, the initA script would always be installed
with corresponding preisnt/postinst generated and added.
If 'sysvinit' is not in DISTRO_FEATURES, we have three situations.
1) A has initA and A.service.
In such situation, systemd.bbclass would set INHIBIT_UPDATERCD_BBCLASS,
so no preinst/postinst about update-rc.d would be added and the symlinks
for initA would not be created.
2) A has initA, and the functionality of initA is not implemented internally
in systemd.
In such situation, symlinks for initA would be installed.
3) A has initA, and the functionality of initA is implemented internally in
systemd or in some other recipe.
Examples for such situation are alsa-state and keymaps in OE.
In such situation, we need to set INHIBIT_UPDATERCD_BBCLASS in the recipe
so that there would be no preinst/postinst scripts about update-rc.d added.
Signed-off-by: Chen Qi <Qi.Chen@windriver.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
